Rich Harden to the Cubs

Awesome deal for the Cubbies

as long as Harden stays healthy they’re right there in terms of pitching.

Harden and Gaudin
for
Gallagher, Donaldson, Murton, Patterson

I was quite surprised the A’s did this deal. Perhaps they know something about Harden (like Mulder, Zito, Hudson). Regardless, it’s good to see the Cubbies give up spare parts (though decent prospects) for Harden and Gaudin….

"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree

by JT12340 on Jul 8, 2008 6:44 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

I'm confused

What did they know about Hudson?

by mraver on Jul 8, 2008 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The first two years in ATL, he wasn’t too great, but he’s been real good this year and last year.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 9, 2008 2:58 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

ERA+

No, Hudson’s first year in ATL was quite good—he posted an ERA+ of 120. His second year ERA+ was 91.

Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball

by Yakker on Jul 10, 2008 5:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I was more referring to the fact that he got hurt the first year.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 10, 2008 7:06 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Injury

OK, perhaps this is quibbling and if so, I’m sorry, but I don’t think it’s accurate to say Hudson “got hurt” his first year in Atlanta.

He missed approx. 4-5 starts, with, I believe, the same oblique injury that plagued him his last year in Oakland. (But maybe I’m wrong with that recollection, it has been a few years…)

Perhaps this is just semantics, but, since the original point was that the A’s somehow “knew something” about Hudson that the Braves did not, it seems as though his oblique was already a very public matter. And, of course, his injury during his first year in ATL didn’t do much to diminish his effectiveness, nor did it keep him from making 29 regular-season (and 2 post-season) starts.

Formerly Uncle Charlie of Minor League Ball

by Yakker on Jul 10, 2008 7:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Just stating that...

virtually every pitcher the A’s had gotten rid of, minus Harang, has not performed to the same level as they did with OAK. Plus, Hudson was merely a solid SP his first 2 years in ATL in overall performance.

"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree

by JT12340 on Jul 10, 2008 7:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't that true for most pitchers?

Granted, there are exceptions, but as a rule of thumb, if you’re dealing a 28 year old pitcher who hasn’t had many injuries or failures thus far, the odds are heavily in your favor that he won’t do quite as well as his career continues

www.loftylantern.com

by OldProspects on Jul 10, 2008 7:50 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't know you tell me...

It’s easy to put out a veiled statement without providing facts and examples…

"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree

by JT12340 on Jul 11, 2008 1:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, it is

see all three posts above this one.

by slurve on Jul 11, 2008 9:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And here I thought when that was posted

It was a joke. Harden has had injury issues, but I do not see the upside in this

by mtk52983 on Jul 8, 2008 6:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

It's the return

of Mark Prior v2.0 to Chicago!!! Slight improvements to the model, but still has the same fallbacks.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 8, 2008 7:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

Beane understands that Harden can go down on any pitch and was wise to deal sooner rather then later.

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
-Jonathan Swift

by King Billy Royal on Jul 8, 2008 10:26 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sad Day

I also thought this was a joke. I’m sorry Billy, but this one is too much for me. I think I’m getting my A’s tattoo removed and I’m going to stop following baseball.

How can you move a guy who when healthy is one of the top 5-10 pitchers in baseball for a 4th OF (platoon vs LHP ideally), a fast guy with no discipline, a marginal C prospect and a decent young arm (that’s all Gallagher is to me)?

I would not have have not done this deal with Vitters and Ceda thrown in.

This is a great blog, I’m going to miss it. I’m done with baseball.

by bl on Jul 8, 2008 7:05 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Goodbye

And don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Harden will never be a top 10 or 50 pitcher unless he starts staying off the DL. That’s a huge risk for the Cubs. I think they gave up way too much. Much, much more than the Brewers did to get Sabathia. Donaldson is one of the top C prospects, just one year from putting up 1075 OPS in Rookie ball. Murton has almost 1000 AB with career averages of .295/.363/.451 814 OPS which is ABOVE AVERAGE. Eric Patterson was a top 100 prospect in Baseball America’s top prospect list going into this year and so was Gallagher.

So good riddance to someone who obviously knows nothing about baseball.

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

by WayneCampbell08 on Jul 8, 2008 9:04 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh... my.. god.

An intelligent post!

When will then be now? Soon.

by Syphon on Jul 8, 2008 9:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta disagree

Gallagher was the main part of the deal from the Cubs – he’s a #3 at best. Harden is a risk, but he’s a top 2-3 pitcher in all of baseball when healthy. I’ll give up those 4 for what we got back 10 times out of 10. It’s a risk, but a very managable and justifiable one from the Cubs standpoint. Harden doesn’t have to be a model of health – if he’s healthy when it matter down the stretch – that rotation is sick. If Rich Hill ever figures things out…

by slurve on Jul 9, 2008 8:09 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harden

Everyone is so sure Harden is a top tier pitcher. Why? What has he actually done? He is having a breakout campaign in 2008 but he has no track record of success. Could he be fantastic – absolutely. But more likely – he is going to blow out his arm and end up back on the DL.

As far as top 2-3 in all of baseball – I can come up with at least 10 guys without thinking – Sabathia, Sheets, Haren, Halladay, Santana, Zambrano, Hudson, Webb, Beckett and even Tim Hudson.

Harden is no more valuable than guys like Volquez, Linecum, Felix, Hamels, Billingsley, Ervin Santana and host of other guys on the verge of becoming dominant pitchers.

I am not against this trade for the Cubs because as I have said in other responses to this thread – the Cubs have a horrible track record of developing talent over the last 6-7 years. I am still waiting to see how they end up messing with Soto. They are worse than the Yankees but no one ever talks about it. There whole team is some other teams stars – Soriano, Ramirez, Derek Lee, DeRosa, Fukodome, Marquis, Lilly, Edmonds, Reed Johnson and Dempster. I just don’t understand why they have had such a hard time developing their talent. I am thrilled that they are able to get talented players to come and contribute but the minor league development aspect has always bothered me. For all the players the Yankees are accused of buying – they still start Jeter, Petite, Posada, Cano, Melky, Joba, Mariano, etc.

Remember also that Haren wasn’t suppose to be more than a #3 or #4 starter either. Gallagher goes to a pitchers park which should help as well.

I truly think the A’s did good with this trade – sell high before the player implodes.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 11:05 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Your post makes no sense, guy. “No more valuable than guys like Volquez, Linecum, Felix, Hamels, Billingsley, Ervin Santana”?! If he was as valuable as any of those guys, this trade would be nuts. Those are top-teir SPs that are cost-controlled for 4-5 years out. Sure, his stuff may be as good as those guy, but his health track record is the only reason this deal got done.

And Mark DeRosa and Jason Marquis are “some other teams [sic] stars”? They’re guys the Cubs took off the scrap heap of veteran mediocrity and have actually gotten decent production from; those are the kind of guys the Cubs should be COMMENDED for getting. (Edmonds and Reed Johnson are, of course, another story.)

I do agree that it’s not a bad trade for the As. I mean, how dumb would they feel if they turn this down and he gets hurt in his next start?

by mraver on Jul 9, 2008 11:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Why?

Why is Harden top-tier pitcher when healthy? I dunno. Maybe the sub-2.5 ERA and 3:! strikeout to walk ratio has something to do with it. Or maybe even the ridiculous numbers he has put up against NL competition. Or just watching him pitch and seeing the stuff he has.

“Volquez, Linecum, Felix, Hamels, Billingsley, Ervin Santana and host of other guys on the verge of becoming dominant pitchers.”

I’d trade the 4 the Cubs gave up for any of those guys 8 days a week.

Minor league development aspect has bothered you? Go look at the Cubs roster. Half of it was developed in the Cubs system. And if it bothers you so much, why are you worried about trading 4 players from said system? A bit of a contradicton you have going on there.

“Remember also that Haren wasn’t suppose to be more than a #3 or #4 starter either. Gallagher goes to a pitchers park which should help as well.”

Yeah… and Mike Piazza was taken with the 2-millionth pick in the draft, while most pitchers taken early that were supposed to be ace types fall off the radar all the time. All we can go on is what we have – and most scouts say #3 / #4 for Gallagher. If he ends up better than that, so be it. This was a move for 2008/2009 and he wasn’t going to transform in Haren this year.

I’m not saying this was a sure-thing slam dunk, but it sure the hell was worth the upside gamble by betting those 4 players.

by slurve on Jul 9, 2008 1:49 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

i don't disagree with anything other than

there are scouts out there that say 2/3 for Gallagher.

by toonsterwu on Jul 9, 2008 2:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

And I don't

disagree with those scouts. I too have seen #2 / #3, I was saying most have him as a #3 / #4. But, that’s all hair splitting – I’m freaking pumped!!!

by slurve on Jul 9, 2008 4:27 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You both aren't getting my post

You are supporting exactly what I am saying. Slurve said that Harden was a top 2-3 pitcher in all of baseball – I am saying he isn’t even close. There are 10 guys head and shoulders above him and another handful of guys at least as valuable as him. You are exactly right to say that his health is the only reason this gets done. I would take any of the 15-20 pitchers I listed ahead of Harden in that trade which is exactly my point.

As far as DeRosa and Marquis – DeRosa put up a 290+ season with 13 hr’s at a 2B that has nothing after Utley, Uggla and a 2-3 other guys so this was a guy that for the position – had top 10-15 numbers the year before the Cubs signed him and has continued to put up similar numbers each of the last 2 years. Marquis – while not top tier pitching material – is still a guy who can average 6+ innings and be a solid #4 starter which is a contribution to the team.

For Slurve and his Harden support – he has great numbers this year but his only full season was less than spectacular and he is going to a park that is not kind to pitchers in the summer. Sean Marcum had some pretty sick stats before going on the DL – should the Cubs have traded for him 3 weeks ago? Sick stats are things that have been sustained over a period of time more than 3 months which Harden has not been able to do. He has accomplished little more than any of the prospects the Cubs traded away in Murton, Patterson or Gallagher at the ML level due to his many injuries.

I think it is worth the risk but my point is, and continues to be, that the A’s did get a lot of value for Harden and would be hard pressed to find more value than what they got.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 2:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Have you ever

watched Harden pitch live or even on TV? Or are you just judging him based on his numbers and what you have heard of him. Not trying to attack you just asking.

by tmt85 on Jul 9, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have - not this year though

I can’t get a pitcher I caught for in college out of my mind when I watch Harden.

He seems lights out the first time through the order but once the novelty wears off, so does his effectiveness.

Also – his home/road splits already indicated he is much less dominant away from Oakland. At home – he has a 1.79 ERA in 50 innings and 61 k’s and on the road – it is 3.38 in 26 innings with 31 k’s. For his career – his away ERA is over 4 and he averages less than 1k/inning while his home numbers are a 2.95 era with almost 1k/inning.

His August and September numbers are his worst which is when the Cubs are going to need him. St. Louis and Cinci are the 2 teams he has pitched the worst against in the NL and they are in the Cubs division.

I just liken Harden to these prospects that everyone is ready to put in the HOF all based on potential but they have actually accomplished very little. He has “upside” which as a Cubs fan, I hopes he reaches, but I don’t have the greatest feeling about the outcome.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 3:46 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

You gotta

give him more credit than that. First you were lumping him in with Lincecum et al. now you’re saying he’s one of these guys that haven’t proven anything. Fooey. The only thing he has left to prove is that he can stay healthy for an extended period of time, which he is in the midst of doing while putting up gaudy numbers. I believe the real Rich Harden is standing up as we speak.

That split point of yours is shaky at best. Very small sample size – and what the hell are you doing bitching about a 3.38 ERA with 31 K’s in 26 IP in the first place? Guys that go on that sort of pace for a full year are Cy Young bound. You don’t strike out 92 in 77 IP being a once through the line-up pitcher.

I’m with you on having reservations about the ultimate outcome, but the risk is soooo worth the gamble IMO. If he’s healthy in stretch run this year – he can single-handedly win games for you – even if he’s not at his best, it’s an immense improvement over the rotation as it was before he arrived.

by slurve on Jul 9, 2008 4:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Again - you help me out

The 2008 sample size is small. His career road era is 4.00+.

Harden has never held up this pace (or any pace for that matter) for a full season. He doesn’t even have enough innings this year to be counted in the ERA leaders since he started 5 weeks late.

He is young enough – that you can put him with Hill, Gallagher and Marshall in terms of how the Cubs will handle him which also scares the crap out of me. Lily, Dempster and Z won’t tolerate any of that nonsense.

My main point has been that the A’s got a lot of value for a guy who has had a nice stretch of 8 weeks but has not had much more than 8 weeks at a time of continuous pitching in his 5 year career.

This is one I would love to be wrong about and will gladly admit if I am.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 9:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Harden

I’ve watched 70% of Harden’s games this year and he certainly isn’t a once through the lineup guy. He has one of the top 5 stuff in the whole of the league. The only question about him is durability and whether he can stay healthy.

by DeJay on Jul 10, 2008 8:17 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

IF healthy,

and i understand this is a huge if(believe me as a hardcore A’s fan i know this is a huge if), but if healthy like he has been you will be amazed with Harden ability. I’m not talking about upside i am talking about ability. Harden is the type of pitcher that has the ability to throw a perfect game when he takes the mound. YouTube some of his outings and you will see. He IS a top 5 pitcher and probably top 3, again when healthy.
“He seems lights out the first time through the order but once the novelty wears off, so does his effectiveness.” this statement is false. he has no problem making it through the lineup 2-3 times. The reason for his early exits is because he loves striking guys out which raises his pitch count, not because he stops fooling the batters. I trust you will know when I’m talking about when he takes the mound for the Cubs.

On a side note, Gaudin is def no slouch. He is a very capable number 4 at least but can def be a 3 type starter. As an A’s fan I am sad to see both of these pitchers go. Harden is amazing as most of you Cubs fans will find out on Friday (i think) when he makes his first start.

by tmt85 on Jul 10, 2008 3:14 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

by looking at this year’s stats, the statement "He seems lights out the first time through the order but once the novelty wears off, so does his effectiveness." has some merit.

First three innings of the game hitters are hitting 169/245/199 against him.
Innings 4 through six hitters are hitting 256/347/432 against him.

I won’t count the innings 7 through 9 because he has had only 16 at bats there, so the sample size is too limited to make any real assessment. He is basically a 6 inning pitcher it seems. Also, all five of the homers he has given up this year have been to batters his second and third time through the order. He has not given up a single HR in the first three innings of a game this season.

Now, if you check his three year splits (from ‘05-’07) the 1st to 3rd and the 4th to 6th inning averages are closer than they are this year, but they are still worse later in games. The number that stick out though is the BB:K ratio. In the first three innings it is at 37:100. In the 4th to 6th innings it is 33:60.

With all that said though, I am one of the ones who believes he is a Top 5 pitcher when he is completely healthy. It is a high risk, high reward trade for the Cubs. But, with the exception of Gallagher, the players they traded away were spare parts. Murton is a 4th or 5th OF with them, E-Patt is a utility guy (defense is not good enough to play 2B full-time supposedly), and with Soto doing so well, Donaldson became expendable. The Cubs have Castillo, a 21 year old catcher in AA doing better than Donaldson who is almost 24 and was struggling in Low A.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 10, 2008 6:22 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

That doesn't mean very much

Take ANY pitcher and you’re going to see a drop in numbers with each subsequent time through the order. It’s something you should expect to see universally. Certainl not overwhelming numbers his second/third time through, but it’s not like he’s lights out and then gets murdered either.

by slurve on Jul 10, 2008 9:40 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don't think so...

While this may be true for the 2nd time through a lineup, it’s very frequent to find the 3rd time through to be much better than either of the first two times through, since the times when the pitcher makes it that far are the times when he has his good stuff.

by BobbyMac on Jul 10, 2008 11:07 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Totally Agree

The Cubs can’t develop a player to save their lives, I mean other than:

their starting SS hitting .312 (Theriot)
Their closer with 22 saves, 43 IP, 30 hits, and 56 K (Wood)
Their league leading setup men combining for 86 IP, 57 H, 94 K (Marmol, Wuertz)
Their catcher, the only NL rookie to EVER start an all-star game (Soto)
Their Ace closing in 100 career wins at at 27 (Zambrano)
Their #5 starter sporting a low 4’s ERA (Marshall)
Their backup infielders filling meaningful roles (Cedeno, Fontenot)

Not to mention the A’s thinking pretty highly of Sean Gallagher who wasn’t exactly pissing down his leg in the bigs either.

Cubs bashing is cool and all, you just aren’t very good at it.

Baseball Instructor - www.frozenropes.com

by HuskerBob on Jul 9, 2008 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Fontenot...

was more of an Orioles proespect than a Cubs one. He was almost major league ready when the Cubs got him in the Sosa trade.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 9, 2008 6:20 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They have screwed up more than hit

They wanted to find a SS to replace Theriot – they didn’t think they had enough with Theriot and spent a great deal time trying to find a replacement – A-Rod rumors all last season.

Their closer almost was out of baseball for being poorly managed. This was a last ditch effort for the Cubs to save face after what they did to Wood and Prior.

Marshall you say….after being a solid starter for them last year – they put him back in AAA, bring him up for bullpen work, spot him in the rotation – it is the same nonsense they were starting to do with Gallagher. Marshall is in the same boat as how they managed Murton, Patterson, Gallagher and so on.

Soto is in his first full season – give it time. Corey Patterson looked great after one season.

Zambrano is the only guy that has come up and stuck for any period of time.

Cubs defending is great…you just aren’t very good at it. I’ve been rooting for this team since Leon Durham pulled a Bill Buckner before it was called a Bill Buckner. I travel annually to Wrigley from good old Buffalo, NY to see them play a couple times a year. I am trying to bash them, their track record is not good with developing young talent long term.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 9:22 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Dude...

I think your’re trying to hard here. I’ll let you get away with bustin’ on them for Prior… but not so much for Wood. Dude was rode hard and put away wet long before Dusty got his his grubby little mits on him. They also tried to get him to adjust his delivery and rely more on a change-up. He actually had a nasty change going for a while, but should have used it more and reused to alter his delivery. Wood ran his pitch counts up so fast, he was often done by the 5th.

Soto should never be in the same sentance as Patterson. Either of ‘em. Stop. Now. Soto controls the zone better than both of those fools combined. This is getting plain silly – you’re pointing at busts the aren’t even comparable. Not to mention them not even mattering – better prospects have failed – it happens. Prospects come out of nowhere – it also happens. I choose to look at each gprospectindividually – trying to hold them up to recent busts and/or successes is a fools errand.

by slurve on Jul 9, 2008 10:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

GO SABRES!

- Ryan in Buffalo

Also, as an A’s fan, good to hear from somebody who thinks this deal has a chance for the A’s. Agree on the carousel upon which the Cubs often place their prospects. Best of luck with Rich.

http://www.myspace.com/ryanmac10

by RyanFromBonas on Jul 9, 2008 11:16 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Gotta disagree

Eric is a worse version of Corey if that is possible. Highly unlikely he develops the discipline to play every day and doesn’t have the power potential Corey had to give him multiple chances.

Murton is not going to cut it as an every day player with an 814 OPS because he’s below average defensively and even if he can get to average, he lacks the power to play a corner OF spot.

Donaldson might be a top C prospect, he’s in A ball, 4 years away. The Cubs are not in a position to wait and find out.

Gallagher hurts in my opinion. He was consistently 91-93 this year with solid movement. I think he’s a legit ML starter in the future. Price you pay in this case.

As for Harden, the injury history is well documented, no doubt. But then the Cubs have maintained a division lead of no less than 2 1/2 games for the last 3 weeks or so without Soriano, Zambrano for a stretch, Marmol ineffective, Ramirez missing time, Fukudome missing time and a change in CF. Even without Harden the Cubs have as good a chance as the Brewers (with CC) of winning the division. A healthly Harden is just a bonus to an already good team.

Baseball Instructor - www.frozenropes.com

by HuskerBob on Jul 9, 2008 9:20 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hahaha

This is the same idiot who claimed the Big Ten was underrated and Illinois was going to run all over USC in the Rose Bowl. I guarantee I know 10x more about sports and baseball than you. When Harden leads you to the WS (I know you are a Cubs fan, one reason I hate you) and these chumps don’t do shit for the A’s I will once again pwn you, jackass.

by bl on Jul 10, 2008 2:15 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Please

quit trying to start unsolicited flamewars on the message board. There was no reason to insult the other blogger multiple times. It decreases the effectiveness of your point, if you had actually made one.

"My mom always taught me it's better to laugh at yourself than to laugh at others. She was so wrong. ;)" -Pedrophile

by Boxkutter on Jul 10, 2008 6:27 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I disagree...

The A’s have a lot of depth (though poor defense) in the OF/DH making Murton another guy in a crowded position. Don’t get me wrong, I think Murton needed a change of scenery, but the A’s have Buck, Car-Gon, Sweeney as their future OF IMO. Donaldson was blocked by Soto, so he was expendable here (blocked by Suzuki and possibly other A’s C’s). Patterson is a solid prospect, but I can’t see him developing into anything better than a utility player or 4th OF. I think he’s an undependable talent who won’t develop. The guy I hate to see go is Gallagher. I think he’s going to be better than Marshall or Hill in the grand scheme of things.

If healthy, Harden can help push this team throughout the playoffs. Even if it is a one or two year rental, it’s worth taking a shot at the WS for a bunch of guys that were blocked by others. If Harden gets hurt, Gaudin can step in and take starts. He’s not great, but can keep them in games. Harden’s health is the key to the DL, so it’s hard to say who the winner is until after the season or next season.

Go Cubbies…

"When Justin Upton faces Lincecum, I think Christ might appear in the heavens, and the world will end." -JakeFree

by JT12340 on Jul 10, 2008 7:25 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

what a horrible deal for the A's

At least get Vitters or Colvin back.

by Bravesin07 on Jul 8, 2008 7:07 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

+1

Considering what Beane ended up with in the offseason, or what the Brewers gave up for CC, this seems like an undersell to me.

Although, I see a couple reasons he pulls the trigger now:
- He’s worried that Harden will break down again, and that he might as well sell while he still has value (definitely not an IF thing, but a WHEN).
- Beane got cold feet during 2006 when he could have sent Zito to the Mets (or whoever), and didn’t want to make the mistake again.

Tim Lincecum is Baseball's Chuck Norris

by Azantor on Jul 8, 2008 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Does anybody

Have Harden’s Pitch Velocity Stats over the past 5 games. I’ve seen all of his starts this season, and his last 2 starts the Angels, and the White Sox raised some serious Red Flags for me.

by Colorado Fan on Jul 9, 2008 11:57 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

someone said

fangraphs said his recent velo was only down 1 mph on average but his own manager said he was down 4-5 mph.

Both could be right, velo readings can be sketchy

by nms on Jul 9, 2008 12:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Radio

I was listening to that start on Chicago radio, and Steve Stone was pretty much stating that Harden was hurt again, due to the lessened velocity and apparent effort he needed to get the ball into the mid 90s. I pulled up the MLB.com Gameday ratings, and he seemed to be all over the place with his fastball velocity (90-96), but from what Steve Stone was saying, he really had to put everything into it to hit 94, and he was working around 91 for much of the game (verified by the Gameday MPH stats). That said, he did have a few pitches which hit 96, so who knows? As a Cubs fan, I am hoping for the best, but am not overly optimistic.

by BobbyMac on Jul 9, 2008 2:11 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

eh it doesn't look good at the moment

But somehow I can see this not looking terrible for the A’s. Still good for the cubs, but if you remember in the offseason Dana Eveland was not impressing anyone and Greg Smith was considered a low level prospect as well. I could see Gallagher breaking out to be a borderline #2, and Murton to be a solid regular with good average and power. I still think the A’s maybe could have gotten more, but despite his recent performance, Harden’s injury history really does hurt his value a ton.

Hey fish, leave those kids alone!

by The Congo Hammer on Jul 8, 2008 7:11 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

In front of that defense, most pitchers can look at least respectable, which I’m going to blindly assume is BB’s plan.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 9, 2008 3:01 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

People need to step back

Harden’s made 26 starts since 2005. You’re not going to get a top five pick from last year’s draft for that. They got a solid outfielder, a solid starting pitcher, a possible starting second baseman and a possible starting catcher. I know people are disappointed that there’s no huge upside guy here, but it’s a solid way to sell on a guy when he’s healthy for five minutes.

by aap212 on Jul 8, 2008 7:13 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Very happy as a Cubs fan

I thought Shapiro did alright for his Sabathia deal, and I graded the Sabathia trade as a A- (LaPorta), B (Green), B- (Bryson), C (Jackson). I think this deal, value wise, is a B+ (Gallagher), 2 B- (Murton/Patterson), and Donaldson as a C+ type. So overall, the value was somewhat expected.

Why am I ecstatic with this deal? Largely because we only moved one of the two big chips. I would’ve preferred to deal Vitters over Gallagher, but as long as we kept 1, I was going to be happy. I am very surprised they didn’t push for Vitters as a PTBNL. Murton and Patterson were spare parts for us, as we were set in the corner OF and 2nd base was solid with DeRosa. There were some that felt Donaldson was striking the ball well but just not getting hits. I haven’t seen him, so I can’t say. He’s shown some signs of life in the 2nd half. His defense has improved a bit, but his value is his bat. It wouldn’t surprise me if Beane and Co. moved him from catcher to maximize the power.

To be honest, I don’t understand this deal for Beane and Co. I thought they were trying to sign Ellis, and they just drafted Weeks (besides the fact that Patterson is a butcher at 2nd). They have a lot of OF options as well. I mean, Aaron Cunningham is basically a better version of Murton (loosely), and I say this as a Murton fan. It wouldn’t surprise me to see both go the way of Charles Thomas, although I could see them trying Patterson in CF potentially.

Keys for this deal come down to Gallagher and Donaldson for Oakland. If the former develops into the 2/3 type (please ditch the slider and focus on that nasty curve … consistency on the curve and he looks real good with a fast/curve/change trio) and the latter’s power reemerges, then this trade will look fine in hindsight. As for the here and now though? I wish the A’s fans well, but I think this trade was a clear win for Hendry. I was worried that we were going to have give up Gallagher/Vitters/Ceda. Now we can keep Ceda if our pen has issues.

Bravesin07 – Colvin has been horribly inconsistent this year.

What’s the most surprising thing to me is the extent to which teams are protecting their prospects. There seems to have been very little market for either Sabathia and Harden, with Philadelphia as the only other serious threat in the Sabathia deal, and for Beane to pull a Harden deal this early, IMO, suggests the market was thin.

by toonsterwu on Jul 8, 2008 7:16 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Your right on Colvin toonsterwu

but he has a pretty big ceiling.

by Bravesin07 on Jul 8, 2008 7:27 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

THIS. IS. SH!T.

Hell, the A’s could’ve put a better package together with Smith/Sweeney/Hanahan. But that’s the kinda of crap we want to get OFF the field.

ok…..I exaggerate a little, but this deal is a joke, considering the calibre of pitcher that harden is

by okteds on Jul 8, 2008 7:47 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

Sure

He’s a DL All-Star.

I reject your reality and substitute my own.

by WayneCampbell08 on Jul 8, 2008 9:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs fan thoughts

Patterson – mis-managed by the Cubs – if converted back to 2B – which would make since because whoever is there is a free agent walk next year – can be a 12-15 hr guy who also steals bases and can hit for average. He is a free swinger so he won’t post obscene obp but still someone who has a lot of upside if he can get a chance to play and not be shuffled to and from AAA weekly and back and forth between positions. Top 100 prospect.

Gallagher – another one the Cubs have mis-managed – back and forth between the pen and rotation, up and down with AAA. There was a pitcher that went to Arizona this year who came over to Oakland in the Mulder deal that turned out pretty good. Haren had done nothing spectacular in AAA or for the Cardinals and he turned out pretty good for 3 years.

Murton – I think you have a Luke Scott type player who can hit .280 with 20 hr power if you let the guy play. Chicago never managed him right either.

Donaldson – upside galore.

I have begun to think that the Cubs are better off just signing veterans because it seems like they cannot figure out how to work their young players into the system. Corey Patterson had to go else where to get his career going again (granted not so much this year), Prior is gassed, Pie is partying too much, Hill is back in A ball now I think and now 3 other good prospects (Donaldson not included) who never really got the chance with the big club are off to another city.

What we got in return was the potential for great pitching however, I would have rather gotten CC who can eat innings and has done so for 7+ years over a guy like Harden who, after 6 years, has only put in 1 full season. Let me also remind you that the full season he did pitch – he had a 4.00 ERA playing in a very pitcher friendly park.

If Harden makes it through this year and the Cubs end the drought – the trade will be worth it however, in the long run the A’s will make out much better for making this deal.

by slickwdb on Jul 8, 2008 10:18 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

re:

Cubs fan as well.

Patterson – He’s never been great defensively at 2nd. For the A’s, I don’t see how he fits at 2nd, unless they decide to let Ellis go and use EP as a stopgap to Jemile Weeks. I can honestly see them trying Eric Patterson in CF.

Gallagher – I love Gallagher. He’s the centerpiece to this deal. The Cubs messed around with him in the minors. He had an amazing curve back in the day, better than Hill’s. I wish they’d junk his slider for now and have him work fast/curve/change, and if the curve develops, they can ponder the slider again. I think he’s a potential 2/3, and I think he’ll be better than Blanton sooner than later. He has the stuff, just needs consistency.

Murton – We did mess with his head and his swing. Fully agree with that. I just don’t know why they went for Murton when his clock started already. Gonzalez/Buck are better in the corners. Aaron Cunningham could be up later this year and he’s a more toolsy version of Murton. I like Murton a lot, and thought he was mismanaged as well, but it’s an odd addition, IMO, other than the need for a righty bat I guess.

Donaldson – I still wonder if he eventually moves off catcher. He’s supposedly improved defensively, but is still average to below average. His value is his bat, and Beane needed a power bat

Is this a gamble for the Cubs? Sure is. Part of me is worried about the rumors that Beane wouldn’t deal unless he thought Harden would get hurt soon. That said, I think the value works, and this is the type of gamble to take.

In all honesty, we aren’t really dealing for Harden for the regular season. The Cubs can get to the postseason without him playing a big role. If he has to take some time off to be healthy, so be it. The goal is to be able to run Z/Harden/Lily/Dempster out there in the postseason. I’ve been huge on Gallagher since his Low A days, but this was the right gamble at the right time, as long as we kept one of our two big chips, which we did (the other being Vitters).
___

There’s a rumor that Jason Churchill put out saying that the A’s were asking for Kyler Burke. If so, that’s a good laugh. Kyler has tools, but can’t hit worth a lick. Strong arm too. I know I’m not the only Cub fan that wonders if he’ll be our next conversion project.

by toonsterwu on Jul 8, 2008 11:35 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs fan #3

I like the trade.

Murton and Patterson were pretty much persona non grata at this point in the bigs. I would have rather seen Cedeno go than Murton (Murton I truly believe could pound the crap out of the ball if given an extended shot) but with Cedeno and Fukudome around, it’s not like he was going to displace them.

Donaldson I liked a lot, but had slowed down quite a bit this season. Plus, he has three (potential) positions. At catcher, he’s blocked by Soto (who’ll be a masher for a while, I hope); it would be unlikely he’d be converted to 3rd (he’s played some in the minors, but Vitters is right behind him) and at 1st, not sure his bat would suffice unless it really developed. So I’m okay with giving him up.

Gallagher I like as well, and I agree with how you think they should have worked with him. But a healthy Gallagher and a healthy Harden…it’s not much of a comparison. Knock on wood, Harden can stay healthy (obviously that’s the key to the deal.) Gaudin is a nice piece on the side. I hope Chicago agrees with Rich’s back/arm/shoulder/oblique/etc.

by PrincetonCubs on Jul 9, 2008 1:08 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

that would be

“with Soriano and Fukudome around”, rather than Cedeno. Ronny displaces nobody at this point

by PrincetonCubs on Jul 9, 2008 1:10 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

They need Harden now

You have Milwaukee and St. Louis lingering and you really only need 3 for the postseason but you need at least 4 and more like 5 to get to the post season. They have screwed around so much with the Hill, Gallagher and even Marshall, that I hope they just put Harden in the rotation and let it ride.

I still have concerns about how Harden will do as the temperatures rise in the windy city. Balls start flying out of that park this time of the year and I am not convinced that he is everything people think he is. Then again, who thought Dempster would be pitching the way he is right now – another gem last night getting himself out of a few jams.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 7:56 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, it's not like he's leading the league in K/9 or something

The balls will be flying out of the yard!

Wait, he IS leading the league in K/9.

This was an exceptional deal for the Cubs. They gave up 4 players, not one of whom had any realistic chance of being above average, for a guy who can lead a team to a World Series title. If it doesn’t work out, it doesn’t work out—but none of those 4 were anything more than filler on the roster of a playoff contender.

Conversely, I suspect the value of this trade for the A’s will be near zero within three seasons as the players either bust out or are replaced by guys with actual upside.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 9, 2008 1:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

eh

I think you’ll have Gallagher at the front of your rotation, as either the 2nd or 3rd starter. He’s got that potential. If you move Josh Donaldson off catcher, his bat might get going a bit more (some people wondered if his learning curve defensively was hampering his bat – granted, still has a inner half hole).

The Murton/Patterson parts, though, I don’t understand for you guys. Gonzalez/Buck and others are better corner OF options than Murton. Aaron Cunningham is basically a better version of Murton without any sort of MLB track record. Patterson – eh, I guess he could stopgap at 2nd if Mark Ellis is let go (or traded), with the idea to bridge the time to Jemile Weeks. That said, E Pat isn’t goot defensively at 2nd. I could actually see him worked in CF a bit.

by toonsterwu on Jul 9, 2008 2:39 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

k/9 has little relation to hr's given up

Hamels has a great k/9 and is giving up more than 1 hr/9
Harang, Arroyo, Lily, Oswalt, Cueto, Brett Myers, Greinke – all at the top of the list for HR’s allowed. Javier Vazquez has always ended up near the top of the list as well.

My guess is that this trade has little value for the Cubs after 2 seasons so if they don’t win the World Series this year have Harden contribute – this will be a wasted deal.

To think that Gallagher or Patterson have no value for the A’s or that Donaldson or Murton are useless to the A’s as well – is short sighted. I think the A’s have a nice rotation for 2009 with Durscherer, Eveland, Greg Smith and Gallagher.

The A’s got quite a bit back for a guy surviving on “upside” who has not done anything for more than 3 months at a time.

by slickwdb on Jul 9, 2008 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

The A's got nothing back for him

Patterson is dreck. The A’s already have a greatly-above average second baseman in Ellis. Patterson is scraping the top of his ceiling to be average. That’s a 3 win downgrade right there, if they’re dumb enough to not re-sign Ellis.

Murton is a guy whose ceiling is a league-average corner outfielder… for a team which is jammed to the gills with prospects like Ryan Sweeney whose ceilings are as league-average corner outfielders.

Donaldson is virtually a non-prospect at this point. He’s a lottery ticket who might miraculously resurrect his career, but I’m sure as hell not counting on it.

Gallagher was essentially swapped for Gaudin, so, eh, advantage A’s there I guess, but not nearly enough to make up for the rest of this crap.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 9, 2008 2:54 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Side note

while I have been hugely disappointed with Donaldson so far (I mean, you still have to produce), the reports on his bat are actually still good, and his defense has gone from below average to potentially average. I wouldn’t exactly call him a non-prospect just yet. Depending on the evaluator, I’d guess right now he’s a C/C+. He does need a strong 2nd half thought.

by toonsterwu on Jul 9, 2008 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Murton

Murton would be the best RH hitter on our team right now. Not saying that he was worth this trade as it seemed like the Cubs seriously undervalued him, but he is a huge upgrade over Brown who is just plain awful. I have no idea why Murton has been sent to AAA unless he isn’t staying with the A’s for long.

by DeJay on Jul 10, 2008 8:26 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Being the best RH hitter on the A's right now

is like winning the Special Olympics. Even if you are, you still suck.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 10, 2008 2:29 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Charming...

But the point still stands. Murton and his 800+ OPS should be in Oakland.

by DeJay on Jul 10, 2008 2:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Top 10

How many of these guys break the A’s top 10 prospects? 1?

by tmt85 on Jul 9, 2008 3:03 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

0, maybe Donaldson

Gallagher will be over the innings mark. Murton is over. Too lazy to check on EP right now, but he shouldn’t be top 10 even if he qualifies. Donaldson has been too spotty for me to think he’ll crack top 10 for a solid system like the A’s. Not impossible, though, depending on who the evaluator is and what they use as criteria.

by toonsterwu on Jul 9, 2008 3:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Top 10

Donaldson wouldn’t get close to the A’s top ten. A 22 year old catcher who hasn’t been able to hit A ball?

Patterson is a good 2B prospect who can’t play 2B or a poor OF prospect. Either way he won’t make the top 10 either (if he still qualifies)

by DeJay on Jul 10, 2008 8:24 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

thoughts

I mean, as long as one is content with giving up that modicum of talent for 8 great starts and no postseason help, then it’s cool.

That’s really all your getting, and the 1 (mayyyyyyybe 2) win(s) it will add to your season could make all the difference. But realize that you’re not getting more than 10 starts.

I'll warm up with you anytime

by ufoboy90 on Jul 10, 2008 12:52 PM EDT reply actions 0 recs

You know what might be really smart (but will never happen) for the Cubs?

Just stash Harden away in a cubbyhole until the playoffs. It looks like they’ll make it easily as is. Let him make a couple of warm-up starts in September, but otherwise don’t risk his arm on relatively meaningless regular season games.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 10, 2008 2:28 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Its been rumored

That Cubs will do just that. Michael Urban (sp?) was on the radio yesterday suggesting he wouldn’t even make his first start with the Cubs.

Baseball Instructor - www.frozenropes.com

by HuskerBob on Jul 10, 2008 3:03 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Cubs need to win

David Bush is looking like he is finally coming around and with Sheets, CC and Parra – that is becoming a pretty formidable starting 4.

The real issue here is that the Brewers are actually starting to hit. The only guy that did anything through the middle of May was Braun. I was at a Brewers/Cardinals game on May 12 or so and at that point, Prince had about 4 hr’s, Hardy wasn’t hitting, Hart wasn’t hitting, Weeks wasn’t hitting (not that he is tearing it up now yet) and they could not score runs. This was a team that was tops in slugging last year but didn’t have the pitching to make it to the end. Cubs have a 4 game lead – they need Harden in the rotation now as much as they do in the playoffs. They can ill afford to “stash” him unless they plan on being satisfied with a Wild Card spot.

by slickwdb on Jul 10, 2008 6:31 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Home field advantage is irrelevant in MLB

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 10, 2008 8:56 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Irellevant?

The Cubs are 35-11 at Wrigley. 20-26 on the road. The vast majority of teams have a better home record – especially winning teams with the exception of the Angels. This past month the Cubs swept another first place team at Wrigley – the White Sox. They then went to the south side and got swept the following weekend. I’d say it matters quite a bit.

by slurve on Jul 11, 2008 9:03 AM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Home field advantage is about 54-46 historically.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 11, 2008 12:07 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

To put it better, the home team wins about 54% of the time.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 11, 2008 12:08 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well...

That’s an 8% difference, which is significant. At the same time, it’s an average compiled from a wide range of teams. I think the Cubs fall decidedly on the more likely to join the 54%. Of course if they play the Angels… that all goes out the window. In other words, looking at how well they play at home and how poorly they play on the road – home field is definately an important factor or the Cubs this season.

by slurve on Jul 11, 2008 12:33 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

I don’t know that you can really draw that conclusion from half a season’s worth of games. It’s been the case so far, but I don’t think it’s an indicator of how they will perform the rest of the season.

Anyways, I wouldn’t say that home field is irrelevant, I would just say that it is largely dwarfed by other aspects, such as talent.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 11, 2008 3:34 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

For one game, yes

For a playoff series, no.

I have been unable to detect any home field advantage in a 5 or 7 game playoff series. Wild card teams advance through two rounds of “road” playoffs all the time.

I mean, this isn’t mathematically rigorous, but if the advantage of home field is 8%, and only about 1 playoff series in 8 goes to 7 games… well, you do the math. A 1% advantage is virtually nonexistent.

Your 2008 Athletics: It's Nothing Personal.

by PaulThomas on Jul 11, 2008 2:37 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, playoff series are a bit different from regular season games/series because the playing time is doled out quite a bit differently. Regardless, I don’t really consider home field to be much of an advantage, and I think the 54% number shows that.

Neglectful father of David Quinowski

by marcello on Jul 11, 2008 3:40 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs

even Braun...

Braun started out slowly, too. Then, in one week he went on a total rampage, and “fixed” his power stats. As late as May 9, his stat line was .264/.296/.444. 9 days later, after 3 2-homer games, he was slugging .593.

by BobbyMac on Jul 10, 2008 10:51 PM EDT up reply actions 0 recs